GNU Nano 4.0 - Hackdot

Re:GNU Nano 4.0 by unveres on Sunday March 24, 2019 @01:07PM (#19477415)

I like the idea of hard wrap, line of code shouldn't be longer than 80 characters... sure it's confusing for beginners + sometimes data shouldn't be hard-wrapped, but in general (imho) it's better than worse

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:GNU Nano 4.0 by a1369209993 on Sunday March 24, 2019 @03:09PM (#19478126)

  if [ x$CMDSH = xshell ] ; then
      grep -qP $BLKLST <<<"$CMD" && CMD='panic' # skip obviously bad commands like
   rm -rf /
      # (this isn't a security thing, we just want to catch stupid mistakes)
  fi

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:GNU Nano 4.0 by tannerwj on Sunday March 24, 2019 @04:27PM (#19478563)

Is this a thing people do? I think I like the idea of it, but haven't heard about it before.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:GNU Nano 4.0 by a1369209993 on Sunday March 24, 2019 @04:42PM (#19478639)

Have comments containing text that could be interpreted as a call to 'break-the-world(err=/dev/null,filter=const(true))'? Not often, but it only needs to go wrong once.

Checking for obvious problems should happen inside eg rm (see `rm --help | grep root`), not in a random shell script, but I didn't want to bother coming up with a better excuse to have rm -rf / inside a comment.

Usually the errors caused by syntax-unware text mangling are either obvious and harmless (so not as punchy of a example) or much more subtle than "destroys literally the entire system".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:GNU Nano 4.0 by r3bl on Sunday March 24, 2019 @02:25PM (#19477880)

Nano is a text editor, not an IDE. There's no reason why every text (not just code) should contain less than 80 characters in every line.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:GNU Nano 4.0 by opan on Monday March 25, 2019 @07:29AM (#19481629)

Can you explain your thought process here? I believe the idea is that old terminals were 80 characters wide. Also, even with modern monitors it can be nice to have shorter lines so you don't have to move your eyes/head as much. I can't think of why the rule would be specific to source code or why it would apply any differently to other forms of text.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:GNU Nano 4.0 by unveres on Sunday March 24, 2019 @05:31PM (#19478899)

Good point! I guess I didn't think it through ;)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:GNU Nano 4.0 by sagartewari01 on Sunday March 24, 2019 @03:32PM (#19478278)

You use nano for coding?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:GNU Nano 4.0 by NullPrefix on Sunday March 24, 2019 @02:02PM (#19477713)

So error out in your parser that uses those files.

[ Parent | on HN ]